Dismissed¶17

Pradeep S/O Sahadev Kapse v. Anushree Pradeep Kapse

Bombay HC27 Feb 2026WP/1656/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim maintenance; maintenance pendente lite; Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act 1955; Hindu Marriage Petition No.A-60/2022; writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs; Rs.8,000 per month interim maintenance upheld; bank account statement April 2021 income Rs.36,930; failure to file bank statements from 15.04.2021; claimed salary Rs.10,000 Supervisor Sut-Girni Mangsa; jobless claim disbelieved; wife and minor son maintenance; Nagpur Bench; neutral citation 2026:BHC-NAG:3608.

What did the court decide?

Since the petitioner-husband did not place on record before the Trial Court his account statement from 15.04.2021 onwards, his contentions that his salary was only Rs.10,000/- and that he is now jobless cannot be believed at this stage. ¶15

Pradeep S/O Sahadev Kapse vs Anushree Pradeep Kapse — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month directed by the Trial Court to be paid by the petitioner-husband to the wife and son is exorbitant and warrants interference in this writ petition.

¶11

Court's answer

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The respondent-wife, who is unable to maintain herself, is entitled to maintenance pendente lite for herself and for their minor son.

¶15

Key takeaways

The direction to pay interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month does not appear exorbitant, and the reasons recorded by the Trial Court do not appear perverse; the Trial Court gave due consideration to the relevant aspects and the husband's income must have increased in the about 05 years since the April, 2021 income was considered.ratio¶15
Having regard to the overall factual and legal aspects, no interference is warranted with the impugned order.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.1656 of 2025 (Nagpur Bench) - Pradeep Sahadev Kapse v. Anushree Pradeep Kapse (decided 27.02.2026, Prafulla S. Khubalkar, J.). The petitioner-husband challenged the Trial Court's order dated 06.09.2023 in Hindu Marriage Petition No.A-60/2022, which granted interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to the wife and minor son pursuant to the respondent-wife's application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Counsel contended the petitioner earned only Rs.10,000/- per month as a Supervisor at Sut-Girni, Mangsa and was now jobless, making the maintenance exorbitant. The High Court noted the Trial Court had fixed maintenance on the petitioner's April, 2021 bank-account earning of Rs.36,930/- and that the petitioner never furnished bank statements from 15.04.2021 onwards; accordingly his salary/joblessness claims could not be believed at this stage. Holding the wife, being unable to maintain herself, entitled to maintenance pendente lite for herself and the minor son, that Rs.8,000/- per month was not exorbitant and the Trial Court's reasons were not perverse - especially as about five years had elapsed since the April, 2021 income assessment and the husband's income must have increased - the Bench found no interference warranted and dismissed the writ petition without costs.

¶1

2026:BHC-NAG:3608

¶2

1 14-WP-1656-2025.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1656 OF 2025

¶5

Pradeep Sahadev Kapse Vs. Anushree Pradeep Kapse

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

Mr. P.J. Mehta, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶8

CORAM: PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J . DATED : 27th FEBRUARY, 2026

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

By this petition, the petitioner-husband has challenged the order dated 06.09.2023, passed by the Trial Court, in Hindu Marriage Petition No.A-60/2022, on an application for grant of interim maintenance filed by the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. By the impugned order, the trial Court has granted interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to the wife and son.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as a “Supervisor” at Sut-Girni, Mangsa and drawing a salary in the sum of Rs.10,000/- per month and now he is jobless. He, therefore, submits that the order of maintenance of Rs.8,000/- is exorbitant.

¶12

A perusal of the impugned order shows that by considering the earning of the petitioner-husband as reflected in his Bank Account Statement for the month of April, 2021 as Rs.36,930/-, the trial Court has directed to pay maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month for the wife and

¶13

2 14-WP-1656-2025.odt

¶14

son. The trial Court has observed that the husband has not filed his Bank Account Statement from 15.04.2021 onwards.

¶15

A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial Court has given due consideration to the relevant aspects and considering the income of the petitioner-husband, directed him to pay Rs.8,000/- per month towards interim maintenance to wife and son. It has to be noted that the petitioner-husband has not placed on record the account statement from 15.04.2021 onwards before the trial Court. As such, the contentions canvassed by the petitioner that his salary was only Rs.10,000/- and now he is jobless, cannot be believed at this stage. In any case, the respondent-wife who is unable to maintain herself is entitled for maintenance pendente lite for herself and for their minor son. As such, direction to pay the interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- does not at all appears to be exorbitant and reasons recorded by the trial Court does not appear to be perverse. It has also to be noted that the trial Court has considered the income of the month of April, 2021 and by now, after about 05 years, the husband’s income must have been increased.

¶16

Having regard to overall factual and legal aspects, no interference is warranted with the impugned order.

¶17

In view of that, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶18

(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)

¶19

𝒫𝓇𝒾𝓋𝑒𝓁

Pradeep S/O Sahadev Kapse v. Anushree Pradeep Kapse

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep S/O Sahadev Kapse v. Anushree Pradeep Kapse

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Matsyavyaysay Shakari Sanstha Maryadit, Thr. President Ravi K. Gawai vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Dept. of Agri. Animal Husb. Dairy Devpt. and Fisheries, Mumbai and Ors.

Prakash Namdeo Dhole (Dead), through His Lrs. vs Hajrat Shah Badroddhin Darga Thr. President, Hayat Kalandar Sanstha, Mangrulpir and Ors.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Thr. Its Divisional Manager, Nagpur vs Smt. Sunita Wd/O Hemant Lade and Others

Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Telhara, Akola Thr. Chairman, Sunil M. Ingale and Anr. vs Divisional Joint Registrar of Co-Op. Society, Amravati and Ors.

Seva Sahakari Society, Sawargaon-Kanhoba, Thr. Representative, Sanjivani Anand Raut vs District Co-Op. Electoin Authority and Divisional Jt. Registrar,Co-Op. Societies, Amravati and Ors.

Anil S/O Sakharam Bonde and Others vs Arun S/O Dattatray Bonde